turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Governor-General of the North American Union
I guess I don't really have a problem with the existance of a GG of the NAU page, but I it should not be on the POTUS page. TR (talk) 02:10, May 17, 2016 (UTC) :No, certainly not. Turtle Fan (talk) 03:16, May 17, 2016 (UTC) I think the "See Also" can go. POTUS is not a "functional equivalent" here, as this is an appointed office and we say in the article that it functions somewhat like a parliamentary system. As for the British PM, how does the one give any insight into the other? Turtle Fan (talk) 03:56, May 17, 2016 (UTC) :It could be that the King ceremonially "appoints" the GG who has been elected by Parliament. I think that's how it's done in certain Commonwealth nations, where the GG "appoints" a PM. (Canada?) The authors are pretty vague about how the NAU system works, and work in a fairly simplistic parallel universe, with equivalents of just about everything. NAU=USA, GGNAU=POTUS, SOL=KKK+IRA, etc. That two GGNAUs were POTUS in OTL is a pretty big clue.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 04:05, May 17, 2016 (UTC) ::Of your three parallels (hardly "just about everything"), one falls apart right away because you're not even setting it up as a one-to-one correlation; another is, from my understanding of the story, iffy (there are significant historical, cultural, and geographical differences between the USA and NAU even apart from the initial POD); and the third is the very point under discussion. What kind of argument is that? Take the end goal you're building to and make it a given of your starting point? "Assume that A=B. Can't you see how it therefore follows that A=B?" ::And yes, I know how parliamentary systems work. For our purposes, suffice it to say that they work very differently from presidential systems. So saying that the GG can be understood as a President and a prime minister is, in a word, absurd. Turtle Fan (talk) 06:09, May 17, 2016 (UTC) I have had problems reconciling the G-G of the NAU with the British style Parliamentary system. See: Talk:Martin Luther King#Not Prime Minister? for example. My previous recollection had been that there was a NAU national parliament equivalent to Canada's but with my random dippings into the book I can only find references to provincial parliaments. On the other hand, there are ministers and deputy ministers mentioned along with a national Tory Party chairman. As I said before, it seems to be a mish-mash of a parliamentary and presidential system. ML4E (talk) 17:26, May 17, 2016 (UTC) :Indeed, which is why I am going to broadly agree with Jonathan's decision to include the "see also" section. While TF is correct that it is in one sense absurd to understand the office of the GG as a president and pm, it also seems clear that RD/HT were (IMHO) trying to do exactly that: mish-mash the office of POTUS and PMUK (or PMC) as much as they could and still keep the constitutional monarchy. Remember, the PMUK is technically an appointed position and the monarch really rubberstamps the person who can keep the confidence of the majority of parliament, etc. :The NAU is a country that we the readers "know" comprises territories that would been an independent nation state that would eventually adopt a full presidential republican system. Within the world RD/HT created, it seems logical that a country made up of colonies that needed some assurance that they would still have say over their own destinies would eventually create an office that would simultaneously be head of government and most of the practical trappings of head of state, and that there would be some devolution on the powers of the sovereign towards the GG. MLK was at one point fairly concerned about the voters, which suggested his role as G-G directly impacted. In OTL, G-Gs are appointed by the monarch on the advise of the sitting PM, but they don't lose their job if the PM who nominated them is turned out of office. :Anyway, that's a longwinded way of saying: I don't think Jonathan's decision is wrong, but I think his response got too hung up details. The broad parallels to both POTUS and PMUK are there, and RD/HT managed to evoke both offices in connection to the G-G throughout the novel. TR (talk) 18:48, May 17, 2016 (UTC) ::It does seem that the authors' concept of the GGNAU was a bit make-up-while-going-along, and they were trying to have it both ways.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 19:23, May 17, 2016 (UTC) Listing grid I dumped it--it isn't very useful without hard information as to term, etc. TR (talk) 21:25, January 4, 2017 (UTC) Albany Plan/NAU Constitution? I think Turtledove and Dreyfuss could have made a reference to a document that was influential for the US constitution to be the constitution for the NAU. HT has referred to inspirations for the US-analog constitution in other works, like the Roman Republic in the Atlantis series. The Albany Plan of Union, created in 1754 at the Albany Congress, largely by Benjamin Franklin. It called for a Grand Council, with seats apportioned to the colonies by their tax contribution, to be the Union legislature, and a President-General, who was the Union executive and needed to assent to bills created by the Grand Council. The President-General was appointed by the Crown and given a royal salary, and the Grand Council was elected by the elected colonial legislatures. Some form of separation of powers and democratic accountability. The Union government was able to have foreign and commerical relations with the Native Americans, and even establish new territories to later become British colonies/NAU Provinces. It also could have its own army and navy. Perhaps this could be the basis of the NAU constitution, perhaps used at the conference between Britain and the 13 Colonies. It's recognizable to US readers yet still look like constitutional monarchy with British influences. Later, as the NAU grew in size and power, the constitution would change to reflect more autonomy given. (SashaBonaparte148 (talk) 23:28, February 28, 2018 (UTC)) :It's not impossible. I don't remember if they even acknowledged such a thing as the "NAU Constitution", so saying anything further is pure speculation. But the authors looking at that system seems like a thing that could happen. TR (talk) 23:46, February 28, 2018 (UTC) :That's very interesting and does seem to match the shape of the office of G-G in the novel. It also addresses some of the issues discussed at the top of the Talk Page that I found confusing about the system. Part of my problem was that I am a Canadian and so my mental image kept reverting to a super-sized OTL Canada. However, I don't recall anything like the Grand Council being mentioned. There does seem to be some sort of cabinet with opposition shadow ministers that might be this council rather than an actual cabinet. I find it interesting enough to read up about the Albany Plan if and when I have the chance. ML4E (talk) 19:57, March 1, 2018 (UTC) :The novel doesn't mention any kind of NAU federal parliament, but we can assume that there is one (federal ministers and provincial parliaments are mentioned), and whatever NAU federal parliament there is we would think it would operate on Westminster lines, but with the GG being more active in the executive (to be the US-analog president). Though, what if the GG and GC/NAU parliament from different parties? Divided government like in the US, or does the GGNAU resign, or just his cabinet? We don't even know if ministers still have their seats in Parliament or do they give them up? Also, appointment of the GG would be a major political issue for NAU citizens who want the effective national leader to be democratically accountable somehow. Perhaps Charles III is conscientious of NAU public opinion for politics? The NAU parliament plays a role? :I wish RD and HT could have explained the arrangment between the colonies and Britain better, it would have been the equivalent of the NAU's Constitutional Convention. Is it possible to ask HT for clarification? Also, Benjamin Franklin said that if the Albany Plan or something like it was adopted, it might have avoided the ARW or delayed talk for independence until much later. It could have been a major influence in the colonial-imperial negotiations--negotiations that were generally mentioned in the novel. (SashaBonaparte148 (talk) 08:55, March 5, 2018 (UTC)) ::Harry's on Twitter. However, since this book was Dreyfus' idea, Harry may not have a concrete answer. TR (talk) 15:53, March 5, 2018 (UTC)